Attorney General v. Mendis – sllr 1995 volume 1 page 138

In Attorney-General v. Mendis, the court addressed the issue of the proper exercise of judicial discretion in sentencing in cases involving white collar crimes, specifically forgery and cheating connected to fraudulent loan acquisition from a State Bank. It was determined that the imposition of a wholly suspended sentence with fines, in light of the serious and premeditated nature of the offenses, was grossly inadequate. The court reaffirmed the principle that sentences must reflect both the gravity of the offense and the need for deterrence, emphasizing the exclusive role of the judge in sentencing and the impropriety of yielding to sentence bargaining. Reliance was placed on established sentencing principles drawn from precedent, with the court holding that public interest outweighs indi